To increase transparency around its processing of project review requests, Verra publishes the average processing times for various types of project review requests. Verra also provides stakeholders with target service-level agreements (SLAs) to establish clear performance benchmarks regarding project review times. Both SLAs and average processing times are available on the Verra Project Hub.
The SLAs differentiate between request type, program(s) used, and the complexity level factor of a given project review.
Review complexity is a factor that is based on a specific project’s individual characteristics and that impacts (1) the technical review and (2) the PRR technical review stages.
Review complexity impacts the technical review stages as follows:
Complexity factors apply to the following review request types for projects in all operational Verra programs:
Review requests for projects in the Climate, Community & Biodiversity Standards (CCBS) and Sustainable Development Verified Impact Standard (SD VISta) Programs begin at high complexity. If any additional complexity factor applies to the same review request, it changes the complexity level of such a request to “very high.”
Current complexity factors are as follows:
Complex methodologies require additional resources and time for review or include certain interpretation challenges.
Any version of the following methodologies is currently considered “complex”. Verra will continually update this table.
| Number | Name |
|---|---|
| ACM0001 | Flaring or Use of Landfill Gas |
| ACM0008 | Abatement of coal mine methane |
| ACM0010 | GHG Emission Reductions from Manure Management Systems |
| ACM0016 | Mass Rapid Transit Projects |
| ACM0017 | Production of Biofuel |
| ACM0022 | Alternative Waste Treatment Processes |
| AM0073 | GHG Emission Reductions through Multi-site Manure Collection and Treatment in a Central Plant |
| AM0080 | Mitigation of greenhouse gases emissions with treatment of wastewater in aerobic wastewater treatment plants |
| AMS III. C | Emission Reductions through Partial Substitution of Fossil Fuels in Transport Applications |
| AMS III. D | Methane recovery in animal manure management systems |
| AMS III. S | Introduction of Low-emission Vehicles |
| AMS III-Y | Methane Avoidance through Separation of Solids from Wastewater or Manure Treatment Systems |
| VM0003 | Methodology for Improved Forest Management through Extension of Rotation Age |
| VM0005 | Methodology for Conversion of Low-Productive Forest to High-Productive Forest |
| VM0006 | Methodology for Carbon Accounting for Mosaic and Landscape-scale REDD Projects |
| VM0007 | REDD+ Methodology Framework |
| VM0009 | Methodology for Avoided Ecosystem Conversion |
| VM0010 | Methodology for Improved Forest Management: Conversion from Logged to Protected Forest |
| VM0038 | Methodology for Electric Vehicle Charging Systems |
| VM0041 | Methodology for the Reduction of Enteric Methane Emissions from Ruminants through the Use of Feed Ingredients |
| VM0042 | Improved Agricultural Land Management |
| VM0044 | Biochar Utilization in Soil and Non-Soil Applications |
| VM0045 | Improved Forest Management Using Dynamic Matched Baselines from National Forest Inventories |
| VM0047 | Afforestation, Reforestation, and Revegetation |
| VM0048 | Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation |
| VM0049 | Carbon capture and storage |
| VM0051 | Improved Management in Rice Production Systems |
| SDVM001 | Methodology for Time Savings from Improved Cookstoves |
| SDVM002 | Nature Framework |
Note: Review complexity is similar to review risk level. However, while review risk level determines review intensity, review complexity determines review duration.
Log In 
Overview